uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Klügl <pklu...@uni-wuerzburg.de>
Subject Re: Questions about TextMarker release
Date Wed, 12 Dec 2012 13:49:36 GMT
Sorry, should have read your mail more closely ;-)

On 12.12.2012 14:48, Peter Klügl wrote:
> I did not care too much about good release cycles/versioning. It was 
> just 1.0.0.qualifier.
>
> I already broke with backwards compability straightaway, so I have no 
> problem to start with a completely new version number.
>
> Peter
>
> On 12.12.2012 14:40, Jörn Kottmann wrote:
>> What was the version of your last non-Apache release?
>>
>> Jörn
>>
>> On 12/12/2012 02:38 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>>>>> You could also want to make minor or major releases independent 
>>>>> from the UIMA release cycle, e.g. when you introduce new features, 
>>>>> change the script grammar or do other potentially incompatible 
>>>>> changes (e.g. fully qualified type names and aliases for them? ;) ).
>>>> Yes, I agree.
>>>>
>>>> What about the version numbers of uimafit? Do they remain the same 
>>>> (1.5.0)?
>>>>
>>>> …btw... after uimafit completely arrived, we need to talk about how 
>>>> TextMarker can interact better with the uimafit concepts :-)
>>> I'd rather tend towards a 2.0.0 since all the package names and 
>>> stuff will change. It's going to be interesting if and what kind of 
>>> backwards compatibility can be provided. I have yet to dive down 
>>> into the dirty details.
>>>
>>> -- Richard
>>>


Mime
View raw message